Jump to content

Cynchwyrm

Members
  • Content Count

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. While I would generally agree in most environments, this is not the case when dealing with a company. As a consumer, you have only one way of voting your displeasure - spending your money elsewhere. You can rant and rage all you want, but if you don't make it clear that the issue threatens to make you stop spending money, it carries no weight. FFG needs to know that how they treat the community that supports their product can cause their consumers to leave. I trust at this point that the message is getting through. How they respond and act in the near future will tell us a great deal about the character of the company. I like FFG games and have spent a good deal of money on them. My continued 'vote' will depend greatly on how they deal with this crisis. FFG - you are on notice with the community for one of your largest and quickest growing products. Proceed with care!
  2. With Tennin Institute, you want to think about your gameplan for using your identity. How do you discourage runs? To do this, you have to flip roles and consider yourself as the Runner. What things make you pause and spend a turn not running? a) Painful ICE - either hazardous or costly b) Recovery rounds - being broke, needing to draw, or replace lost tools To create these situations, things like taxing ICE, program destruction, tag punishment, and various traps can be used. You have some of these, consider what you might do to ramp up the pressure. Cerebral Overwriter is an amazing trap, and works great with Mushin-No-Shin. Landing a single one with 3 or 4 counters will completely change the tempo of the game. Komainu is really painful when it lands, taxing while on the board, and Inazuma can turn it back on. Power Shutdown is a nasty way to kill programs if the Runner is not prepared. If you go the taxing route, consider dropping the Bad Pubs since they will work against you. This is an interesting list, experiment and have fun!
  3. Kahadras, Your post on ICE tactics was informative, and included some good things to consider. It appears you change up mid-way and possibly confuse R&D and Archives. I certainly wouldn't worry about ICE on Archives first turn unless I had three in hand and suspected Datasucker or Sneakdoor (and my other two cards are agendas). Your three catgeories of ICE are a decent way of thinking of things, but I also like the categories of Tax vs. ETR and 'Binary' vs. 'Analog' (coined in an article by MagicDave), Almost all ICE can be described with those two characteristics. ETR can end the run, and is the main way to stop a runner until they have the right breaker. Taxing ICE doesn't stop the runner, but imposes a cost of some sort (like you mentioned in your post). Binary ICE basically shuts down in the face of the right breaker (so it's either On or Off), whereas Analog ICE continues to provide resistance and effect even when the runner can break the subroutines. For example, 1-3 strength Code Gates are generally Binary in the face of Yog.0. Stronger Code Gates are Analog, as they are pretty expensive to break through. Data Raven is Analog because you take a tag to run through it, even if you can break the trace subroutine. Tollbooth is great Analog ETR ICE, whereas Static Wall would be an example of Binary ETR. Eli 1.0 is probably one of the best Analog Taxing ICE in the game (while it has ETR subs, you can always get through it, even without a breaker - but for a cost). Binary tends to be used for early ICE, counting on slowing or stopping the runner until they can get breakers out. Analog ICE has better long term value, and choice over using ETR versus Taxing really depends on what you want to do. Generally Taxing is best for centrals, discouraging multiple accesses in one turn, whereas ETR ICE in a remote is usually the best way to protect and score agendas. These things vary based on the deck and plans for winning, but knowing what role each of your ICE plays, and the balance you have in your deck is key to establishing the right ICE suite - one of the most important components of a Corp deck.
  4. Our normal gaming group of 4 has been playing 2 Runner vs. 2 Corp, with normal victory conditions (7 agenda points per side, either runner flatlined, either corp decked). I initially thought it was strangely balanced, but after a few weekends in that format we have determined it favors the runners much too heavily. We alternate turns corp-runner-corp-runner, but it still gives the runners 8 full clicks to take advantage of a corp in a bad position. While this leaves the other corp a free turn, this only balances if the corp is fully ready to jump on the chance. We are doing a sponsored corp-runner format now with each side having a corp and runner, and the corp can spend a click and a credit to give their runner 3 credits. Same 7pt shared vcitory conditions. This plays more like two individual games rather than a true 4 player table, but is much more balanced. We may try the Big Sell-out sometime, but I want to seriously pare down all the additional house rules to start with.
×
×
  • Create New...